Gentrification in Austin and the far right


After a prolonged struggle against gentrification in East Austin and repeated pickets against Blue Cat Café and its owner, Rebecca Gray, for violating the community boycott of F&F Real Estate Ventures, the far right has come to the defense of Blue Cat: Trump supporters, neo-Nazis, and InfoWars have been writing articles defending the café as well as harassing community members online and posting pictures of Mussolini.

It has been clear for some time the kind of friends Rebecca Gray keeps close: friends like Christopher Kinlaw, who is still facing charges for arson for an incident where he allegedly set fire to a condo in a building with over 300 sleeping people inside, waited to charge his phone before leaving, and locked the door behind him. This was all to get out of a lease and a failed attempt to frame his roommate. Rebecca Gray keeps an advertisement for Kinlaw’s company Domus Outdoor posted proudly in her window.

Rebecca has been seen online posting and supporting racist comments against the Chicano community she has invaded as well as imaginatively referring to herself as John Galt, a fictional character from the grotesque imagination of right-winger Ayn Rand. After the most recent picket, which generated much police and media attention, the far right has firmly placed itself in Blue Cat Café’s corner. In a recent article from fascist mouthpiece and Trump fanboy site InfoWars, they presented their white supremacist support for Blue Cat Café and places like it by stating,

Gentrification is the process whereby former run down, crime-ridden areas are regenerated to become welcoming business hubs that provide cultural outposts and employment.

Social justice warriors aren’t big fans of that and would prefer such areas to remain gang-infested ghettos where innocent people—particularly white people—are harassed and attacked.

What they mean here could not be more clear—they are saying that brown and black people are criminals and that the only culture they are interested in is white culture. When Nazi ideology openly comes to the defense of a gentrifying business, it becomes more important than ever for you to support the boycott.

The demarcations have been clearly drawn: on our side there is the people—of all faiths and backgrounds, from many different ethnicities—and on their side is the strong arm of white supremacist capitalism, arsonists, fascists, and Trump supporters, who have squirmed out of the woodwork like pestilence to call us terrorists. One Blue Cat Café supporter has this to say: “You commies are so degenerate all we can is pray for you . . . Pray for the day you die. The next round of progroms will star you as the target.”

We assume she means pogroms, which was the term used by fascists in the extermination of Jewish people. These are the friends of Rebecca Gray and the mentality of those who support Donald Trump. Some peaceful, friendly cat-lovers these turned out to be. . . . .

Blue Cat Café was righteously attacked by legal protest and illegal direct action. We will not condemn these tactics; we must instead understand them. The march east of white supremacist capitalism in Austin comes in the form of gentrification. It leaves in its wake nothing but pain, loss, and economic hardship. The perpetrators of this process are not only white people: oppressed-nations people can be and are part of gentrification. However in Austin it is white business-owners and white customers who are the most aggressive and invasive when it comes to robbing us of our neighborhoods. This is the reason why the far right comes out to defend places like Blue Cat. It should come as no surprise to anyone that the working class and especially the oppressed-nations working class are fed up to the point of rebellion, of taking matters into their own hands. Some will say that illegal activity is going “too far”; we say it is fine—that is right to rebel! To our readers who find themselves on the side of the people, there is no limit to what you can do and there are many ways you can get involved. Increase the pressure on these scum and drive them out. It is true that a little glue in the door’s locks and a little spray paint will not end the existence of Blue Cat. It becomes clear then that things must be taken much further. Blue Cat is only one antagonism, a point of rupture where the contradictions have become sharp. It stands and should thus fall as a symbol of gentrification. We must not see it as an end goal: other gentrification establishments as well as the gentrifying customers must also be target, with mass movements and with direct action. Gentrification is organized violence. We must respond accordingly and in kind.

Austin has become increasingly expensive while working-class neighborhoods like Rainey Street have been uprooted, with the homes left standing now as a playground for the rich. The east side has seen a steadily decreasing black population due to gentrification. Austin infrastructure had been constructed to cordon off the east side and keep us in poverty until the ruling class wanted it for themselves and began displacing everyone. Now our local movements are being targeted by white supremacists, fascists, and Trump supporters. When such battle lines have been drawn we must all choose sides: to support Blue Cat at this point is support fascist methods of slander and intimidation. To oppose Blue Cat means standing against institutional racism and with the working class of the oppressed nations. There are two Austins: one that produces filth like InfoWars, places like Blue Cat, and other overpriced establishments that are only accessible economically and culturally to the well-to-do white population, many of whom have invaded from out of state. The other Austin is one we know well but hear less about it: it is the people’s Austin, a city that has deep-rooted indigenous, Chicano, and black culture, a place where working people of all stripes come together in moments of crisis to defend one another—this is such a moment, and even if you were not born and raised here we insist that it is your duty to side with the people of Austin.

The fascists have raised almost $2,000 for Blue Cat to not only cover the damage but to hire security. This is an old phenomena in the context of colonialism, from Algeria to Palestine to old US settler frontier towns. The methods are the same: anger a people so much that you are compelled to hire police to use violence to enforce your presence on an unwelcoming population. While this case does not come close to the terror evoked by the examples given, the mentality behind this move is exactly the same. Finally and most importantly it is the people, not weapons, that are principal, and it is the people themselves who will rebel, rise up, and cleanse the earth of gentrification. Cameras and cops will not protect Blue Cat. The people have spoken in a loud chorus of protest as well as with their actions. The people will be heard, and their warnings must be heeded. This is not simply a question of spaces and tastes or a question of just culture for that matter: it is a question of politics, of economy, and most importantly it is class struggle.

Which Austin do you intend to be part of? Which class do you serve? These are the questions you must ask yourselves if you have yet to participate in this struggle. Do not let your inactivity speak for you—and most importantly, fight for our class, fight for our Austin! Blue Cat Café is not safe to visit: it is a battleground. We discourage everyone from attending lest they should find themselves in between two opposing forces—anti-fascism and fascism.

Blue Cat and all of Texas sits on stolen land!

It is right to rebel against fascism, reaction and gentrification!


Why I Still Defend the Red Guards

This is a guest article written by our Comrade Drew Smith, while we do not agree with all of his positions we feel that this is an insightful and critical look at very important history. Comrade Drew is a graduate student working on his M.A. in Soviet-Chinese relations and Maoist movements within the Eastern Bloc. – RGA


For better or for worse, despite the grievous suffering and the mayhem they wrought, the Red Guards were unconventional heroes of history.


Lately for my thesis I’ve been reading a lot about the Red Guard movement during the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in China for my M.A. thesis. True, my thesis takes place in Eastern Europe, but the Eastern European individuals whose stories I’m telling were trying to become Red Guards themselves, whether consciously or unconsciously. They were “bombarding the headquarters” of the ruling parties of their native countries and were “rebels” who were practicing Marxism-Leninism in a way that took on those who also claimed the mantle of Marxism-Leninism. Thus, for the first few weeks of this semester, I did a serious investigation into the Red Guard movement.

So far I’ve read Mao: The Real Story by Alexander Pantsov, The Battle for China’s Past: Mao and the Cultural Revolution by Gao Mobo, Mao’s Children in the New China: Voices from the Red Guard Generation by Jiang Yarong and David Ashley, Fractured Rebellion: The Beijing Red Guard Movement by Andrew G. Walder, The Cultural Revolution in the Foreign Ministry of China by Ma Jisen, Mao’s Little Red Book: A Global History by Alexander C. Cook, and Evaluating China’s Cultural Revolution and Its Legacy for the Future by the MLM Revolutionary Study Group. It’s been an exhausting past few weeks of painstaking note-taking, analyzing, and engagement. It’s also been a journey of myself being confronted with uncomfortable questions that go against the almost Pollyanna narrative that I was taught by the Revolutionary Communist Party USA in my youth. Now that I’m older, wiser, and no longer trapped in the traditional RIM paradigm, I can no longer simply scoff away things as “bourgeois propaganda” or “exaggerations”.

In these texts I am confronted a multitude of uncomfortable facts. There were, indeed, many actions by the Red Guard movement that were truly horrible. Thousands of innocent people were persecuted, tortured, and driven to suicide due to humiliation. Countless beautiful, priceless treasures and relics from China’s past were destroyed. By mid-1968 the entire Red Guard movement had completely fractured into literal civil war (the Red Guards in Beijing were fractured against each other from the very start, in fact) with youths waving the same banners, wearing the same uniforms, holding up the same Little Red Books while shooting each other with guns seized from People’s Militia armories. In fact, Mao himself had to suppress the Red Guards to restore order in the country. Finally, as a revolutionary intellectual myself, I am forced to acknowledge that I most likely would have been denounced (at best) by one Red Guard faction or another during the Cultural Revolution. Indeed, while the rest of the Cultural Revolution’s mass movements seem to be righteous and constructive, sometimes I’ve wondered to myself after school: do the positives of the Red Guards outweigh the negatives? Why am I a Maoist if I know that I’d most likely have gotten airplaned and dunce-capped by my students, if not worse?

Well… I’ll tell you why I continue to stand by the assertion that the Red Guards were a positive thing and that if I had been in high school or an undergraduate during that era, I’d still have joined their ranks. Real talk: when you build a socialist society, youth who don’t experience the original revolution are going to have to learn how to be revolutionaries by practicing revolution itself. Kids need to figure out what’s best for the world, who stands in the way of making a better world, and how to fight those who pretend to be their friends but are in fact their oppressors. Yes, Red Guards smashed beautiful works and buildings of China’s past, something that breaks my historian heart [side note: eventually the CCP and PLA put a stop to this in May of 1967, only a year after the launching of the Cultural Revolution]. They ransacked people’s homes in extrajudicial searches, and would burn and loot local Party and Militia offices. But these were youth, caught up in a whirlwind of energy, who were trying to figure out how to destroy an old world that had oppressed them for so long. I myself have been told by a former Red Guard that when she was a teenager, burning a local temple dating back to the Tang Dynasty and then beating the priests was exhilarating because she could finally exact vengeance on those who told her she was born a girl because of something wrong she did in a past life.

The Red Guards may have been at times unnecessarily cruel and merciless towards Party cadres and revolutionary intelligentsia, but when they went among the workers and peasants we see an enormous transformation that went both ways. The Red Guards brought revolutionary ideas to the people, ideas that were put into practice and produced great results. In turn, the masses taught the Red Guards proletarian consciousness, hard work, and humility. Red Guards became amateur medics, literacy tutors, rescue workers, and political organizers. They helped form new peasants’ committees and labor unions that were independent from the old Party brass which were able to rebel against those who abused their power in industry and agriculture.

Red Guards also broke with traditions that kept youth down such as filial piety. Could you imagine being told by the leader of your nation that it was correct to stand up to an abusive family member? I can’t imagine how amazing that would have felt in a society where Confucian ideas had been codified in everyone’s mind for millennia. As someone who came from a dysfunctional family here in America, I can only dream of what that must have been like.

Yeah, yeah, I know, revolution is not a dinner party. Every Maoist spouts that out whenever confronted with arguments against the Cultural Revolution. Yet I think another factor we need to keep in mind is that the Red Guard phenomenon was something that had never been tried before, and like any initiative of that type there’s going to be a matter of trial and error. The Red Guards fractured and spun out of control for multiple reasons, but in the end the movement was a learning experience for modern revolutionary youth and students and both historians and revolutionaries should never “throw the baby out with the bathwater”. Most of all though, we must recognize that the Red Guards initiated many other endeavors of the Cultural Revolution that produced more than destroyed. To end with a metaphor, the Red Guards may have kicked up a lot of dirt, gave many groundskeepers unwarranted ass-kickings, and smashed a lot of gardening tools, but they still sewed seeds that became beautiful gardens.

Long live the memory of the Red Guards! It’s right to rebel!

Join the election boycott! Get some posters, put em up!

We want to see the election boycott spread to every part of the country, and to make that a reality we want to ship a stack of free boycott posters (for the cost of shipping) to anyone who will put them up in a working-class or student neighborhood near them. Hit us up at and we’ll get em out to you ASAP!

Or you can download em here and print em yourself. If that link doesn’t work, try these:

If that doesn’t work either, please send us an email!

Once they’re up, take some pictures of em, upload em to every social media space you can, and tag your post with #dontevoterevolt, let us know, and encourage other people to get involved in the boycott as well!

Read Serve the People – Austin’s article about the boycott here.

Why We Are Boycotting the Elections (STP-Austin)

Below is an article by Serve the People – Austin that answers questions and further explains the need to boycott the election.



1. Why go so far as a boycott?

The capitalist-imperialist system is one where the ruling class holds all the power, and because of that fact, the only democracy that exists is ruling-class “democracy”: it is democratic only for the ruling class, and workers are not represented. No matter who is elected or what their intentions are or what party they represent, the interests of the very rich owners of industry are always put first.

Many workers are already aware of this fact, so many in fact that this is reflected in the voter turnout of the last presidential elections in 2012, which was somewhere around 54%. The lowest percentage of voters is found in the section of the population making less than $20k per year. The fact that only about half the population even votes, with no indication that this number is growing, means that millions and millions of working-class people do not feel that voting is a productive or useful activity. These people are not wrong. What it means to us is that the masses are losing faith in the electoral system.

One of the main explanations given by people who did not vote but were registered to vote is usually being too busy with work to either follow the political circus closely or make it to the polling station. This is due to the fact that this system makes us break our backs daily with very little to get by on. It then taxes the shit out of us and lets our schools, streets, and houses fall apart. Meanwhile, politicians who pop up on TV tell lie after lie so many times that we have come to just stop listening to them. They make plenty of campaign promises and keep almost none of them. So many people were hopeful that change would come with Obama’s election just to be disappointed when black people were still being killed by police at an escalating rate, US bombs kept falling on the poorest nations on earth, and people continued to be broke and struggling right here.

Whichever party wins—even if their election campaign theatrics vary—their practice once they take office is still the same. The jobs exported under Reagan continued being shipped out by Bush, Clinton, Bush Jr., and Obama. Whether a Democrat or a Republican was in office, US workers lost their jobs and faced harsh welfare cuts and a police force that looked more and more like an army. The military however still manages to receive enormous funding, and the gap between the working people and the rich has only increased. Some people call this “globalization” and blame secret organizations. We say that these groups are not very secret: they are the monopoly capitalist ruling class, who are few in numbers but run the country with a firm grip, and elections are just one way they exert their class dictatorship over the workers. The giant corporations and especially those who head them are engaged in a kind of decaying capitalism that spreads like a plague across the planet in search of profits and cheap resources to steal. When capitalism reaches such a stage it is what we identify as imperialism. US imperialism is the most aggressive in the world and has disastrous effects for workers here and abroad. It cannot be voted out. No matter who you vote for, the ruling class wins. No party running can be an alternative in such a rigged game.

After the same routine every four years with the exact same results, we are fed up with this shit and say enough is enough! We demand real change, which can only come about with an end to capitalism—an end to capitalism that means real democracy, for the majority, not one that is actually only for elite parasites at the top of a predatory food chain called capitalism. Every day we can feel the need for a better world where we can treat one another with love and respect, where we can all be equals. This world is not only possible, it is a necessity—only thing is, you can’t vote for it.

2. The myth that not voting helps the conservatives

There are those out there who are so drunk on voting that they will try and scare or shame others into doing it. They will tell us that by not voting we are allowing the right-wing to win. This is just illogical. Both the so-called left and the right alike use the exact same campaign measures, so not voting does not help or harm one side more than the other. This peer pressure tactic lacks analysis and clear thinking.

Both the major parties and all of the other ones for that matter support capitalism and are essentially the same on all important issues. In this system as we have seen the “third parties” do not stand a chance. This is not due to us not voting but due to the power that corporations and the ruling class possess over this so-called democracy. Even if these third parties stood a chance at winning, they still support capitalism and cannot stop imperialism just by holding office. These politicians are confined by a series of checks and balances that materially prevent them from getting rid of capitalism. Boycotting the elections is the only means at our disposal of breaking with this system, by seeing straight through this mess and identifying the whole system as the enemy.

3. Why we do not run candidates: no candidate can be a revolutionary

It’s simple: revolution means a drastic change, not a little unnoticeable one. Real change, the type this country desperately needs, does not and cannot come from the ballot box. The end of capitalism is what is required, and that requires millions of active participants. The same is true for any reforms. Reforms only happen when the ruling class is forced to act. The action that brings change always, without fail, has come from the people themselves and has been rooted in mass struggle. The capitalists and landlords may need to exploit us to live, but we do not need them at all! Real change comes from mass movements and revolutionary movements only. These movements do force the ruling class to make concessions here and there, but that is not enough, and if we stop struggling they take them back immediately. It will take a real revolution to stop the capitalists for good and liberate the people.

When they are elected all these politicians act the same. They extort taxes, go against the people, and serve their masters. They hurt people to stay in office and make more money for the rich, not just here but around the world. Due to this fact, all change comes from the outside of the electoral system. There are many examples of this. The civil rights movement is one example, where it was obviously the power of the people and not the politicians that made the changes (even though these changes were far from enough).

Revolutions do not fall out of the sky. They do not come from nowhere. They come from the intentional activity of the working class. Revolution requires a full ideological break with the ruling-class “democracy” and the electoral system that is in place. If we put up our own left-wing candidates, that would fail: it would fail to break fully with the ideology of capitalist elections, and it would also fail to help others to make this break as well. It would only add to the confusion. By refusing to help people break with what the capitalists are trying to sell us as “democracy,” we actually would perpetuate their ideology—dragging working-class and oppressed people back into the voting process, back into a system which they have already become disillusioned with and have largely abandoned. Most importantly, election boycotts allow us to organize with those who already see through the sham of capitalist “democracy” rather than pull them back into a system we see as undemocratic.

4. Why we don’t believe in changing the system from the inside

The whole system from the bottom to the top is set up to maintain capitalism. Even if a lot of progressive or “revolutionary” candidates were elected, the gigantic government bureaucracy with its millions of staff and managers and directors would still be in place, keeping things running business as usual—keeping the people down, no matter what. The loyal government staff sharply control the actions of anyone who gets elected. The state also rules through the courts, the police, the military, and the prison system, and none of them would sit idly by as real pro-people reforms were attempted. When socialists have been elected to high positions in countries around the world, they have most often been overthrown by their own military. There are also other things in place that are designed to safeguard capitalism—these include the school system, which insists on teaching racist, capitalist history regardless of the facts. There is a whole ideology of capitalism that rules over us on the TV, in the news, online—and all of them are controlled by corporations and the ruling elite. These servants of the ruling class cannot be voted away, and their power cannot be returned to the people only on the good intentions of a single progressive politician.

The state has one primary function—to serve capitalism, no matter who heads it up. We have never, not even once, seen the system truly change from “working on the inside.” And in almost every case it is the system that changes those who go into it, even those who start with the best intentions.

5. Why we don’t vote for “the lesser of two evils”

It is already evident that all this system offers us is shit, so why should we eat it? While candidates and parties differ on some issues, both operate within the boundaries of what is acceptable to the ruling class—without exception. There is really no lesser evil when both parties agree on robbery and war as a means to sustain capitalism. To vote for “the lesser of two evils,” we would have to sacrifice our politics and principles. We feel that everyone should be honest and open about their politics and not be forced to sacrifice their integrity every four years and cast votes for people who they still consider evil. The goalposts keep moving, and it seems with every four years that past, the lesser of two evils has become just as evil as the greater evil was last time! So we must ask: when the hell are we going to start actually fighting evil?

6. Boycotting vs. doing nothing

The reality is that almost half the population already engage in a passive boycott, just by not voting. This is why we insist on turning this passive boycott into an active boycott. An active boycott is not a call to do nothing: it is most clearly a call to get organized in an active, truly democratic, and revolutionary way. The way we see it, with how little voting has ever accomplished, voting is far closer to doing nothing, while actively organizing a boycott is no small task because it directly confronts and challenges the whole idea of this ruling-class “democracy” with revolutionary activism and revolutionary ideology. In short, we would rather spend our time building for revolution than continue for a moment to pretend the votes they give us mean anything.

Voting once every four years to see which stooge of the rich gets to lord over us is undesirable when it is put next to the unlimited possibility of an organized and militant working class. When we really consider our options we come to the conclusion that it is better to do everything in our power to change this system and not give in to the nothingness of voting.

7. The myth that only privileged people do not vote

Capitalism and its supporting structures—sexism, racism, and white supremacy—are what keep privilege intact, so only what stands in opposition to capitalism has any chance of restricting or abolishing privilege, domination, and exploitation. While voting alone cannot result in any serious changes, mass struggle will, and that is exactly what we are promoting by supporting a boycott.

On the contrary, we feel that those who are comfortable enough with the way things are have a certain amount of privilege that allows them to feel secure with the extremely limited methods the system offers. For poor working people and specific oppressed groups, voting does not offer liberation, security, or equality. So it is mostly white middle-class people who have enough privilege to rely exclusively on voting. The rest of us have to struggle a lot harder for something better.

8. How is boycotting any better?

While we do not think that boycotting the vote by itself will offer up any significant change—this boycott is part of a much larger strategy. Most importantly, it offers us a chance to promote an ideological break with this system, its elections, and its phony democracy. It offers us the opportunity to organize with others in the interest of building a real revolutionary movement that neither relies on nor operates within the perimeters of what is acceptable to the rich. It expresses our issues in a way that does not seek the approval of those who would keep us down. We see no need to appeal to the oppressor. The boycott is just one small aspect of our work. It is the start of something, not the end of it. We also actively run pop-up free stores and free food and grocery programs, and we are engaged in a number of pro-people activities, and we never ask for permission from this crooked system of the criminals at its helm. We are building people power every day and helping the working people in the city break from depending for their basic survival on the exact same system that keeps people down. Again, this system needs us, but we do not need it. There are so many organizations that put their own agendas before what the people need, but the people are our only agenda. We are not asking for votes, and we are not trying to sell anything.

9. On the question of throwing away our votes

Again, in actuality, we are expressing our anger much more clearly than voting—we are expressing an anger not just at the way these electoral politics work only for the rich but also at the whole system and at the rich themselves. We encourage a full break with this system—not casting blank votes, not voting for mock candidates who cannot win, and not writing in the names of people who do not exist. We are choosing to not vote because voting in any way gives legitimacy to a system that half the population already sees as illegitimate. We refuse to vote for an evil. We refuse to vote for the Green Party or a “socialist,” because all of them would be throwing away our votes. We are choosing to not vote because voting has lost meaning to us and has come to mean participation in this bogus system. By choosing to not vote, we demand revolutionary change and start out on that course. When we do finally vote, it will not be to toss our choice away on someone who could not care less about people and only cares about profit; when we do finally vote it will mean something, because it will be in a radical new revolutionary society where the workers are on top.

Contact Red Guards Austin to see how you can get involved!


On correcting mistaken ideas in Boston


A response to Mass Proletariat 

We feel that the public document titled “A Course Correction for Maoism in the US” by Mass Proletariat (Boston) deserves a public response. This is not our preferred method but due to the documents public nature MP has set the method of exchange on this matter. While we have been eagerly following this org since their recent split with the Maoist Communist Group we are still limited in our understanding of what political work they actually do the ground. Only time will tell and this fact limits the scope of our response.

The only qualifier given to their grandiose offer to ‘correct the US Maoist movement’ is near the start of their statement where they refer to their “workplace struggle”. We find this departure point alarming due to the fact that in every single work place workers already struggle – there is zero mention of MP organizing this struggle. As of the time of the publication of their document, official communication has not been secured between us or anyone we are in regular communication with, leaving the bulk of their “course correction” limited to vague speculations which slips right away on its first step into the subjectivism these comrades are trying to criticize. It remains trapped in the perceptive stage of knowledge and can only comment on their incorrect perception of things as an insular group within what they refer to only as “the US Maoist movement” while at no point qualifying what that is or who they are even talking about.

The US Maoist movement is not homogeneous, it is hardly a “movement” yet. The prescriptions put forth here suffer from isolation. MP has not bothered to engage with any official lines or statements put out by actual MLM organizations. They have not given an account of what their practice even looks like, just lofty truisms posturing as “a corrective course”. It would appear that their “correct ideas” have in fact fallen from the sky!

They go on to state that;

In a political situation correct action to advance the class struggle is not possible without careful investigation.”

This is certainly true and we insist that they apply this standard to themselves before they start prescribing it to others. This document is suggesting that they can advance the class struggle, nay, correct it, without doing a thorough investigation themselves! Does investigation simply mean reading social media posts? From the little they have given us during the span of their existence it would appear so.

To make matters worse this document is full of what might be useful criticism, however they fail totally to ever actually say who it is they are specifically criticizing. Two MLM organizations are mentioned by name; one no longer exists, the other is MCG who they split from and have no interest in uniting with, the rest is thrown into the wind and we MLMs are just supposed to snatch out what may or may not be a criticisms of us? At no point is this document specific, it is not clear weather the target be MLM organizations or one of the numerous MLM led mass organizations. Here they speculate again:

In the last few years we have seen the emergence of nearly a dozen collectives in the U.S. which aspire to promote Maoist politics” Really? We would love to know who they are talking about here because we count only 5 or 6 at most. Of course it is possible there are Maoist collectives we have never heard of but surely such a guess lacks a scientific communist method of analysis. Had they been in contact with literally any one of these 4 collectives that were never part of MCG they would have learned quickly that none of us think “base areas are right around the corner” this ludicrous speculation not only reveals their insular thinking on the subject, it reproduces the material conditions for it by insulting a movement they have yet to really join in a meaningful way. While we agree to the need to combat subjectivism, dogmatism, empiricism etc. we must warn these comrades that this is impossible to do when corrections are called for from on high with little effort to demonstrate practice. If these corrections were framed as self-criticism on the part of MP then that would actually mean something. It would seem though, that much of the issues they have with MCG and its former Richmond branch, which they have themselves identified, are reproduced here in this document. Without investigation or official communication these comrades are indeed subscribing to the notion that “what you see is what you get”.

This “corrective course” becomes even more muddled and confused by the bizarre use of terms. They often use the term “backwards” which should be understood in communist terms to mean reactionary, yet it’s used to describe everything from the RCP-USA to MCG, none of which can qualify as reactionary. They state that;

Even at a backwards rally, many workers will grasp key contradictions such as those between them and their bosses.”

We are not sure what a “backwards rally” even means here but would certainly not work within, or participate, in such rallies like Klan rallies, Trump rallies, or InfoWars rallies. In fact, we would confront such reaction and attempt to force it down.

They opportunistically use Stalin to segue into an opportunistic use of Jiang Qing. Let us unpack this. While Stalin did commit the error pointed out by Mao he did not constantly nor perpetually ignore all internal contradictions, we can fault Stalin for not being Mao but in doing so we actually abandon historical materialism, this is better left to the Trots.

While Jiang Qing correctly struggled against the “bloodline theory” MP’s citation of this again fails to keep a thing in its historical context; in the conditions in which it moved. Comrade Jiang stated these things as a party official of a party which was in power, under the conditions of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Offering this distortion they are making of her correction (as their own), is opportunism. No one in the US MLM movement ascribes to bloodline theory that we know of. Trying to correct such an error which does not exist appears to be an effort to cover for the class reality that composes the membership of MP- which is in its majority not proletarian. Lets examine the difference.

The children born under the proletarian dictatorship in China no longer maintained a bourgeois relationship to production; they participated in class struggle, production and scientific experiment, this was their reality so of course they could develop correct ideas. They did not bear the marks which their parents had and their ideology was, in the majority of cases, already transformed. They had been proletarianized, which is what Mao continued to do by sending students down to the country side. This document by MP smuggles in a petty bourgeois aversion to such a process of transformation, perhaps out of their own fear of being identified as petty bourgeois academics who have not developed close links with the masses. Under the dictatorship of the bourgeois such classes maintain their status, both socially and economically, at the expense of the workers. They do not participate in the class struggle (unless its tourism) and they do not engage in production or scientific experiment. They have yet to be transformed and persist in such petty bourgeois ideology which sees revolution as something they can step into out of no where and correct. This is the reality of class struggle, and conflating the conditions of the dictatorship of the proletariat with those of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie in what is self interest, is nothing short of revisionist contortion. We hope that through protracted mass work and documented summation of practice that this can be transformed and such posturing can be eradicated. If their shit stinks then they should not fault those who can smell it.

While structural factors alone do not determine class stand, transforming ones thinking is required to truly stand with the proletariat. This holds true for many workers themselves who are still deeply attached to bourgeois ideology and narrow self interest. Our organizations should not be composed majorly by those who rely only on theory without participating in production or experiencing the conditions of the workers. It is not up to class allies to consider themselves transformed, their material conditions have determined their consciousness not the other way around. By having organizations led by actual class conscious workers who are Maoists, we have seen beneficial results ourselves. The New Communist Movement distinguished itself from the New Left by the very fact that its spearhead, the Revolutionary Union, pursued a policy that integrated themselves into the working class, while others drifted into on-campus obscurity. Turns out since the proletariat is the revolutionary subject, the only course is to join it and take part in its struggles. If one wishes to have the correct class stand, this is not a matter of sympathy or simply a question of agreeing with the working class- it is also material.

Currently there is mass resistance to black national oppression in the form of the Movement for Black Lives (MBL). Some wrongly dismiss this resistance as completely consolidated to a reformist line. These comrades focus on reformist statements made by various leaders of MBL, but fail to investigate the contradictions within the mass movement.”

Here, again, we have no hope of surmising who is meant by “some”. Do they mean Maoists or non affiliated individuals? Had they actually read the published articles from Maoist organizations they would find that they are a little late to the dance on this topic. Since we cannot say that these comrades specifically are charging RGA with the error of ignoring the contradictions between Black Lives Matter as organization and as a movement as well as contradicting aspects within each of them respectively, we hope to defend not only ourselves but others within what they allude to as the Maoist movement. For starters we (RGA) emerged from this Movement for Black Lives, since our inception, not only have we pointed to these contradictions but were actually born from them. This is evident and explicit in both our year one summation and numerous statements and articles we have produced on the topic. Mass organizations lead by MLM comrades such as Progressive Youth Organization-STL have shared invaluable criticism and analysis of their memberships direct involvement in the Ferguson rebellion as well as “BLM” as a whole. At no point did they ignore the internal contradictions. Even organizations which are not led by black Maoists such as RGLA have done public education on the history of Black Liberation movements in the US – they too do not ignore the internal contradictions. Former organizations such as the NCP-LC and both chapters of RSCC have authored and published articles on this very topic. Not only does MP not say who they are talking about, they do not seem to even know who (or what) they are talking about. No one has sought “purity” in the mass movement, we have been partisans in it and have a firm base of practice when we offer up our “corrections”.

The document in question warns readers of the dangers of social media and this is half true, They fail to understand the use of a thing. Future Menshiviks would oppose Lenins call for a party news paper based on the same grounds. Social media has mass participation. We do not for one second think it should be used to organize anything or build the party, what it should be used for is propaganda and the spread of ideology. They can only take a mechanical approach and not really contend with the dual aspect of the thing when they prescribe such platitudes as: “At this moment there is a need for Maoist forces in the U.S. to engage in serious ideological exchange and line struggle. This cannot happen on social media forums (which are platforms for state surveillance), text messages, or a few conversations among individuals. Instead, Maoist political organizations in the U.S. must utilize secure communication and in-person group meetings to struggle, criticize, and transform.” more on this later.

Section five of their document gets bold in stating that:

Many in the U.S. who nominally adhere to Maoism actually put into practice a politics of supposed purity, which is opposed to Maoist mass line politics. This typically manifests in reductionist ideas of the distinction between friends and enemies based on adherence to the ‘brand’ of Maoism and/or the social class of members of the masses. We must call this what it is: an idealist politics of purity that negates the need for two-line struggle at all times.”

This sounds like genuine anti-sectarianism and a desire for unity on the surface but go a little deeper….. by saying “nominally” as well as “Maoist mass line politics” and “brand of Maoism” they have smuggled in revisionism. Let us be mercilessly clear on this fact; two line struggle means the struggle between the communist line and the revisionist line, capitalist and communist ideology in struggle- which is not detached from previous line struggles, from where these lines have been concentrated. Line struggle corrects and improves a line. So clearly it is not a question of contending brands of Maoism but a question of Maoism or revisionism. Ideology is reduced to sectarian infighting by MP and ideological content of Maoism is brushed aside as “yet to be determined” according to them, especially when they try to subvert ideology by refusing to understand that LINE STRUGGLE IS CLASS STRUGGLE. There are no contending brands of Maoism – there is only Maoism and revisionism. This distraction is revisionism smuggled in quietly via liberalism. It is not a question of purity or pure theory it is a question of weather or not Maoism exists or if contrarily it is yet to be synthesized. We know Maoism exists so we aim to use it as our guide to action. The mass line is correctly understood as a method of Maoist leadership, the mass line is not the fundamental aspect of MLM, such reduction is to literally liquidate Maoism as the third and highest stage of all Marxism. Ideological struggle is important if we wish to bloom and contend against the domination of revisionism over the US left. We must abandon eclecticism and post-MLM trash which presents itself as “MLM”.

Maoism is of course a living and developing science, however, this does not mean abandoning what has already been proven true and accepting eclecticism similar to left-refoundationalists, Kasama or the RCP-USA. These alterations and improvements which must be applied to MLM must come from the class struggle itself in the applications of the universal to the specific. Reducing ideological struggles to the low level of competitive brands or a desire for “purity” is the least Maoist way one could look at the situation.

We find the next issue to be so ill informed that our readers must be asked to forgive us for quoting this section at length;

Other organizations defend political work which, in content, is the same as charity, as being beyond critique. They claim that that this sort of engagement with the masses will eventually lead to the creation of base areas. These groups do not understand the need to differentiate between the advanced, intermediate, and backwards members of the masses. In opposition to these idealist deviations, there is a need to expand both the scope and quality of political work among the masses. We must also expand principled discussion and struggle between Maoist forces in different locales. Serious ideological struggle and comradely criticisms between groups are the preconditions of building a MLM party in the U.S. There is limited time in a day, and only so many years in a life. In order to make concrete gains, we must cast aside all illusions of purity, struggle to grasp our strengths and shortcomings, and learn from our past failures. Internally, this takes the form of principled democratic centralism. Only through this process can we build a proletarian political force capable of establishing a DoP. The abandonment of democratic centralism in favor of pure centralism results in the promotion of supposed experts detached from the concrete needs of the proletarian movement. This has and remains an Achilles heel of the Maoist movement in the US. Even in 1971, Bob Avakian was introduced to members of the Revolutionary Union as ‘the man who will lead the revolution in America’, and that was at a time when the group was a far cry from the backwards party it became and remains. In the recent experiences of the NCP(LC) and MCG(NY), a similar phenomenon of self-declared leaders developed, divorced from the actual needs of organizations and of the class struggle. Rather than fantasizing about who will be the people to lead a revolution, the emphasis should fall on the theory and practice needed to advance revolutionary development now.”

While MP refused to be direct, and honest- we do not share their liberal malady and will say it like it is without mincing our words. This section is clearly directed at the Serve The People programs which operate as mass organizations around the country in 5 different cities. The issue is that MP is not honest or direct when leveling this criticism. None the less let us grapple with it and see where it fits. For starters it is apparent that MP has not actually investigated any STP and is operating solely off their best guess. This statement comes out the gate on a massive confusion- STP is not just “political work” it is mass work. STP from its inception here in Austin has been open and honest with the fact that its work alone or isolated from the life of the party will not establish base areas. Base areas are won- in the true sense – by force of arms. While Mass Proletariat carefully avoids ever issuing a statement pertaining to military strategy or armed struggle at all for that matter, the Mass organizations under the banner of STP have been upfront with their stances on the necessity of armed struggle and revolution. STP has also been upfront about the fact that the masses are not a homogeneous group and that revolutionaries must contend with the contradictions that exist among the people- this is identifying clearly the existence of the advanced, intermediate and backward. STP has actively struggled against errors committed by charities and has even written articles against NGO’s. This is, like most things, a work in progress. They then go on to suggest that not only are the masses and cadres in STP too theoretically ignorant to identify the levels of consciousness which we face, but that our scope and quality of political work among the masses must be expanded. This is nothing but an order from up high; a “correct idea” innate in the minds of some intellectuals. In what ways has MP ever suggested, let alone demonstrated, how it is that we can expand the scope and quality of our work among the masses? No shit it must be expanded! Mass organizations are not born adults, like everything else, they start out small. They grow and develop in both scope and quality. In fact STP has blossomed into multiple mass organizations since its birth less than two years ago. What is the mass work MP has been doing all this time? In reality this section as well as the overall document is guilty of its own charges: it reveals the closed off thinking of those experts who are detached from the needs of the proletarian movement. We aim to meet those needs directly and materially while advancing the masses and their specific struggles but let us first explain exactly why STP is not a charity.

Charity is most popularly understood as hand-outs from above which offer peace, salvation, comfort etc. Charity can only ever fill the potholes (temporarily) which are created by capitalism. MP makes a fundamentally revisionist error by understanding the act of giving things away simply as charity. They are only looking at physical production and totally ignoring political line and specifically the politics which command STP. STP does give away items, however, it also does far more than this, it educates and organizes the masses to take part. It identifies the enemies and mobilizes people to target them. STP engages in exposing the contradictions of capitalism, not glossing over them as charities do. By subjectively only looking at one side of things, MP has again lapsed into delusion. STP stands not only to assist in providing the masses with material aid, but in the process of doing so it seeks to ween the people off of dependence on the state and the ruling class for the things that they need; be they material goods, services, cultural needs or political needs. In order for revolutionary ideas to spread among the people, there must be a clean break with this system, there must be a break with its ideology and with dependence on its representatives that infest the hood in the form of NGO’s, churches and charities. STP takes this question seriously and stands to become a true fighting organization of the people. We are not so ignorant as to think that we can gain the trust and support of the masses by simply holding demos or selling them papers. We must aim to share their daily struggle by acknowledging their needs and showing an earnest desire for their health and well being. This kind of mass work is as rooted in Maoism as anything else and cannot be dismissed as “charity” so easily. STP-LA the second mass organization with the name has made international news due to their militant confrontations with gentrification in Boyle Heights. While the other organizations are newer, there is nothing in their practice or content which could justify the dismissal as charity the way MP has done here in a cowardly way, which covers their asses with “plausible deniability”. This reveals not only their class stand but their relationship to ours. Our people go without so we provide for them. This service does not exist in a vacuum– it gives us an ear, a platform among the people. It provides us with innumerable ideas directly from the people. Every single serving and free store concretizes the practice of the mass line method of leadership. These comrades bemoan the self styled leaders of the past without contending with the process in which communist leadership emerges- through the masses in practice, which is something Serve The People is demonstrating. We do not fault them for making any criticism which they feel appropriate we just insist they not be liberals about it, that they actually investigate and struggle with the material practice of other organizations. Especially when their “corrective course” in no way reveals what proper communist mass work should even look like. To know a pear you must first taste it!

The fantasies of MP continue as they insist on “isolating the backward” while calling non-revolutionary but progressive organizations backward. Not only do these comrades have such a high opinion of themselves that they think they can correct the movement, but they also think that they can “isolate the backwards” with no political power! This is an ultra-left delusion fitting of their former partners in Richmond. A correct understanding of the mass line is found however in Mao’s own words in the text titled: ‘Some Questions Concerning Methods of Leadership’ where he states;

The masses in any given place are generally composed of three parts, the relatively active, the intermediate and the relatively backward. The leaders must therefore be skilled in uniting the small number of active elements around the leadership and must rely on them to raise the level of the intermediate element and to win over the backward elements. A leading group that is genuinely united and linked with the masses can be formed only gradually in the process of mass struggle, and not in isolation from it.

is Mao correct or is MP correct?

Contrary to Mao himself, MP is bent on isolation even in the absence of power. They go on to revise Mao by adding this;

“All of these backwards tendencies functionally promote the understanding that class ideas are synthesized separately from actual politics by a self-appointed ‘leadership’. This approach is a negation of the mass line. In order to avoid these deviations, Maoists must fuse with the masses, investigate their situation, and work to identify divisions internal to various mass movements.”

So is it uniting around leadership or is it fusing with the masses? Is it winning over the backward elements to the cause of revolution or is it a fools attempt to isolate them in the absence of power to even do so? We agree with Mao and will leave this correction aside so that when it comes into contradiction with reality these comrades can stand to learn a thing or two from their own mistakes.

The whole conception that MP has of the mass line is incorrect in previous documents they have mentioned “concentrating the correct ideas of the masses” the correctness of an idea however, is determined in the concentrating process as well as the propagating stage of the mass line. What MP has here is not the mass line, it is a distortion of it which amounts to cherry picking the ideas of the masses which MP already see as correct! What is worse is not only do they think they have the power to “isolate the backwards” they also think they can “isolate backwards ideas”! We seek to transform and correct mistaken ideas. We oppose cherry picking and posturing.

The document concludes with a call to link up. While it may be news to only MP, we must state that we have been, and remain, in conversation with our comrades in other collectives, We even worked along side members of the new RG-PHL in our summer cadre school program. Maybe they mean official organizational links? Maybe they mean establishing some husk that resembles democratic centralism prematurely as a mere formality? We hope not. Unity is formed through a process of struggle, it faces uneven development and set backs. At least at this stage of struggle we know that we can count on exchange and support between these collectives.

MP suggests;

To advance, we must promote prolonged and ongoing ideological exchange and discussion among emerging Maoist forces about political practice and theory. This process is not organic. It cannot be left to chance. It must be planned, scheduled, and methodically approached in relationship to the needs of the moment. This development cannot take place on a Facebook forum. It needs to be a concerted effort in which time is made amongst comrades in different locales to struggle over foundational issues. Eventually, this practice will need to expand on a mass scale, in which every town and city in America will have a place people can go to learn about Maoist political practice and share experiences, in the spirit of the great link-ups of the Red Guards during the GPCR. The spread of this practice will contribute to the founding of a Maoist communist party in the U.S. The central argument of this essay is that there is a need for Maoist forces to link up.”

The Red Guards of China were not seeking to build a communist party, their gatherings existed long before the internet created the contradiction these comrades are trying to point out. We feel that social media cannot be casually dismissed it must be understood and utilized responsibly, that if debate erupts there then many people can learn from such an exchange and that it is up to those involved to set a better example. Social media exists and people are going to use it. There is no sense in avoidance. Of course organization to organization communications are handled between collectives in agreed upon methods. The proletarian populated MLM collectives are small and new, we simply cannot afford to hop on a plane and “Link up” for regular meetings. In our year one summation we mentioned how our leadership has spent time with RGLA, and in this document, how RG-PHL leadership attended our cadre school, this has forged the basis for principled unity.

We conclude that such a process can be organic or it can be planned. Line struggle is an inevitability that will arise most anywhere and inside of every group. It cannot be limited exclusively to planned meetings. For instance here is line struggle; here we have responded in the way we were forced too, by the fact that MP has issued their statement of corrections intended for the Maoist movement, which of course includes us in RGA and our comrades elsewhere. We cannot simply “link up”. We will struggle for unity with others and not submit to responding in private to liberal allegations which were made in public. We have already spent more time responding to the positions of these comrades than they deserve since in the final analysis their arguments are baseless and divorced from experience. We are saddened by the continuum of pomp and ego spilling from the east coast. We hoped for better and issue this statement not as a denunciation but as a firm correction to the misconceptions casually vomited out from MP. Again we plead with these comrades to take their own advice to investigate before they speak publicly and to actually have the patience to await official exchange especially when we were in the process of establishing such. We welcome direct contact and will not after the publication of this document continue to exhaust energy on the matter in the form of open polemic.

Sincerely and without pride of place,

Red Guards Austin September 2016

Original article can be read here;

Remembering Chile critically

There is far too much to asses regarding the 1973 coup d’etat for the scope of this single article, however we feel that in a sea of 911 memorial posts around the fascist take over and bombing of La Moneda in 1973, much of the most vital criticisms fall to the wayside. While  Salvador Allende was the closest thing to a socialist president Chile has ever seen, and was genuinely attempting to keep the interests of the Chilean people at heart, the internal contradictions were the principle actors over the external conditions. The coup first and foremost stands as a stark and mournful warning against the sort of revisionism which we refer to as the parliamentary road. Allende won presidency in a close race and was elected in a run-off by congress as no candidate had gained a majority. This was the start of a doomed project that can best be understood in its dual aspects. On one hand this left wing president is an icon to many and is correctly upheld as a martyr and fighter against US imperialism. On the other hand his parliamentary, electoral road to socialism led to a fascist military Junta. The principle lesson to be gained here is summed up by Mao Zedong who teaches,

“…every communist must grasp the truth; political power grows out of the barrel of a gun…” and “…without a peoples army the people have nothing.”rcpchile

Are these two statements by Mao correct? Yes, they are correct as well as universal and we must understand these truths when summing up the fall of Allende. Marx, in assessing the failures and successes of the Paris Commune had already laid out such truth which was reverberated by Lenin when theorizing the nature of the state, that; the proletariat cannot assume control of the ready made state apparatus that there necessarily has to be a smashing of the state. Failure to smash the state has inevitable and tragic results. From the genocide of 1 to 3 million communists in Indonesia, to the murder of Thomas Sankara, to the Coup in Chile; the parliamentary road is one doomed to the worst kind of defeat, it is soaked in more blood than armed revolution could ever be accused of. The revisionist reading of history diverts from both historical materialism and dialectical materialism by its insistence that the negative turn of events is due materially to the CIA operations, this outright places all focus on the external factors and not the internal class struggle- worst of all it fails utterly to learn from its own mistakes. The revisionists long for an Allende of their own and they present us with even less revolutionary versions in the form of “socialist” candidates that they still ask us to vote for.

Much more work and research should be done on the contradictions between the revisionist Moscow aligned Communist Party and the Revolutionary Communist Party of Chile which would require volumes. What is important here is class stance and a true understanding of how fascism comes to power. Latin American Marxist leader Jose Carlos Mariategui taught that fascism is what emerges for capitalism in order to sustain itself when it is in decay and thrown into a state of crisis, when the bourgeois ruling class can no longer rule in the old way (in the absence of a communist vanguard party). Allende by virtue of his high office was the embodiment of such a crisis, any socialist who took seriously the project of collectivization and nationalization would also create such a crisis, and the bourgeois would do as they have done, respond with its heavy shock troops- fascism. Revolution and reaction are antagonistic opposites, one must do the other in, there can be no coexistence between them. Allende even in the most charitable understanding did not provide the people with either a peoples army or establish the dictatorship of the proletariat-  which is an absolute necessity in protecting the gains of the working class by the suppression of the bourgeoisie and its reactionary fascist defenders. Furthermore the working class in spite of the nationalization and collectivization of certain industries never became the ruling class, or the leaders of revolution. On one hand you had a progressive national bourgeoisie represented by Allende who sought social welfare and on the other a reactionary comprador fascist bourgeoisie represented by the Junta, these two forces came into such contradiction that it could only be solved through means of war, a war that the progressive forces could not win.allende-with-pinochet

Allende himself weaved the rope that would be used hang him by appointing Augusto Pinochet to be the commander and chief of the Chilean army on august 23rd 1973, less than one month later Pinochet would lead the fascist US backed coup. The masses themselves remained unarmed, without militias or a red army of any sort which could safeguard against this inevitable reaction. Every socialist revolution or step toward socialism is met with reaction. From Chang Kai-shek, to the Czarist white army we can see the bourgeois react violently to social change. Two things are required to stamp this threat out, a peoples army and mass support, neither of which were secured or created by Allende. Peaceful transition to socialism is not only revisionism but the most dangerous kind of idealistic dreaming that has very real consequences. The Fascist’s wasted no time in torturing and persecuting communists, socialists, artists, intellectuals and workers who they were at all suspicious of, their reign of terror lasted for decades and their economic reforms placed the poor on the receiving end of prolonged violence.

The CIA took advantage of an internal contradiction to topple an anti-imperialist leader, to rob the Chilean people of hope for a more egalitarian society and prop up a sympathetic reactionary puppet government as they have done the world over, however, the CIA is not invincible. In reality the CIA and all American imperialism is a paper tiger. It has been crushed the world over by revolutions and national liberation struggles, in Korea and Vietnam we have seen the US beaten back and sent running by the masses of people, we have seen it resisted and allowed no victory for the past 15 years in Afghanistan. We will continue to see it get its teeth knocked out everywhere it goes until we see it toppled here at home in its very heart.

So what do these harsh lessons of the Chilean tragedy offer us in 2016? Fist and foremost it offers us a cautionary tale that revisionism in spite of even its better intentions cannot and will not serve the people, that no matter how sincere a socialist candidate might be they will still find the end which met Allende. Voting socialist and participating in the bourgeois elections can be met with such a fate. Even before they could accomplish such a spectacular end revisionism and the electoral road results in nothing but defeat. A persistent march down this road has been the course of the majority of the US left which still orients itself to a minority of the population in appeals to voting. They are content enough with the way things are to continue dancing with the existing system. This year we will not be asking for anyone to vote in this charade of capitalist politics, not for Jill Stein who pales in comparison to Allende and stands far less of a chance at either being elected or actually standing up to imperialism, nor for either of the two mainstream candidates who are both so right wing that either represent a hopeless continuum of the general trajectory of this system. Secondly we can take hope from the situation by a clearheaded view of its shortcomings, we can surmise that while the CIA can make use of reactionary forces that it cannot be triumphant and that it will be dashed on the rocks of revolution, provided we apply the lessons we take from the history of class struggle. We can proceed with honestly as we abandon the parliamentary road, when we build for revolution and when we construct the Party and the peoples army, when we establish a united front of all progressive forces led by the party. To do this revisionism must not be given ground and it must not be allowed to take root among the people. When say remember Chile, we must also say never again!



News from Comrades in Turkey

This is a recent statement from Halk Cephesi (People’s Front) International Relations Committee , please read and share widely- RGA





The Hasan Ferit Gedik Centre for Struggle and Liberation against Drugs, which was founded by Halk Cephesi in 2014 in Istanbul’s Gazi Mahallesi, in order to wage a struggle against drugs, was raided by AKP’s murderous police in the early hours of August 31. As a result of the repression in the drug rehabilitation centre, 15 persons that were struggling to get rid of their drug dependency were taken into custody.

The AKP seeks to popularize drug use, especially in revolutionary neighbourhoods, in order to hinder the politicization of the youth. While drug dealers are warned and punished through the efforts of the Gazi People’s Assembly and the members of the Halk Cephesi, the AKP rewards these pushers by calling them victims of terrorism and compensating them.

Drug dealers, which are punished by the Halk Cephesi, are escorted from the neighbourhood under police protection! The patients, the people’s children, struggling to climb out of the system’s quicksands, are taken into custody at dead of night and agonized by armed police officers!

This centre, tasked with keeping the struggle alive, adorned with the name of Hasan Ferit Gedik, who was slaughtered by drug gangs during an action to oppose the degradation of the people in Istanbul’s Gülsuyu Mahallesi, hosted the 7. International Eyüp Baş Symposium for Peoples’ Unity against Imperialist Aggression on April 15-16, 2016 to progress the peoples’ anti-imperialist solidarity. This centre was raided and occupied by the police because this centre gives hope to the peoples of the world, because it pulls the youth out of the system’s quicksands!

Even though 1 week has passed since the assault took place, the police attack the people at gunpoint, the families of the drug-addicted individuals, taken into custody, are assaulted and detained! The Murderous police have occupied the Hasan Ferit Gedik Centre for Struggle and Liberation against Drugs and are building a police station. The Big Gazi Park, which belongs to the people of Gazi, was occupied by the bloody-minded police, who closed all of its entrances and exits!

We invite all of our revolutionary friends to display solidarity against the conversion of this centre, at which the people’s children have been receiving treatment against drug dependency, into a police station.

To demand the release of those of our friends, with whom we ate and drank together, those friends, with whom we, at the symposium, organized solidarity against the issues of the peoples of the world; to hinder the conversion of this centre into a police station, let’s organize actions of solidarity in front of Turkish Embassies and Consulates all around the world! Let’s publish statements of solidarity!

Down with Fascism, Long Live our Struggle!

Long Live International Solidarity!

We Demand the Release of Those, Detained at the Hasan Ferit Gedik Centre For Struggle and Liberation against Drugs!

We Will not Allow for the Hasan Ferit Gedik Centre for Struggle and Liberation against Drugs to Be Turned into a Police Station!

We Will not Allow for the People of Gazi to Be Slaughtered!

Halk Cephesi (People’s Front) International Relations Committee